by Sherif Badr
After another massacre due to gun violence in the United States, this time at Umpqua Community College in Oregon, President Obama "asked news organizations to tally the number of Americans killed by terrorist attacks over the last 10 years and compare that with the number killed by domestic gun violence. And he implicitly compared the trillions of dollars spent and multiple agencies devoted to preventing the relatively few terrorism deaths with the minimal effort and money spent to prevent the far greater number of gun deaths." (nytimes.com)
The most chilling part of the speech for me is the realization of how "routine" the entire response has become. "Somehow this has become routine. The reporting is routine. My response here ends up being routine. The conversation in the aftermath of it. We've become numb to this. We've talked about this after Columbine, after Blacksburg, after Tucson, after Aurora, after Newtown, after Charleston. It cannot be this easy for someone that wants to inflict damage to get their hands on a gun."
Several organizations have answered the President's request:
BusinessInsider.com - Business Insider actually took the analysis requested a step further and looked at global deaths vs global terrorist attacks! Chars below:
You'll notice a spike in 2001, obviously for September 11's terrorist attack. Imagine if the 9/11 tragedy didn't occur. There would be absolutely no justification for the big business that is now anti-terrorism, not to mention the focus (and by focus, I mean time and dollars) this gets from media companies worldwide.
The sad conclusion:
Looking at these numbers provided by CNN, Forbes, Rollingstone, Vox and Business Insider, it seems to me that if "increasing the number of guns in America" actually was a terrorist plot, it would be more effective than any other terrorist plot to date, if the goal were killing Americans.
What do you think is the solution to gun violence? More guns?
More from around the world!